Legislation that would have reduced regulations on the state's title insurance industry was poised for approval earlier this month, then a combination of efforts from top state officials and advocacy organizations helped stop it from becoming law last week.

The bill, which would have partly rolled back regulations from the state Department of Financial Services on the industry, didn't make it to the floor of the State Senate for a vote Friday before lawmakers left Albany for the year.

That was after members of the State Assembly unanimously approved the legislation in the first week of June. Efforts to defeat the bill were thereafter ramped up by its opponents, who set their sights on the upper house.

Former DFS Superintendent Maria Vullo, two days later, wrote a memo to members of the State Senate outlining her opposition to the bill and how the agency had come to craft the regulations it targeted. The memo was obtained exclusively by the New York Law Journal Monday.

“Particularly at a time when the federal government has drastically limited the deductibility of state and local taxes — including property taxes — and mortgage rates are increasing, we must take every step possible to reduce the cost of homeownership,” Vullo wrote.

The legislation is carried in the Senate by State Sen. Neil Breslin, a Democrat from Albany who chairs the Insurance Committee. Breslin, an attorney, declined to comment on what happened behind the scenes to kill the bill, which he had expected to be approved by the Senate without any problems earlier this month.

The legislation would have allowed title insurance agents to pay for meals with prospective or current clients, usually attorneys or real estate agents, and pass that cost along to consumers as a marketing expense, as long as the meeting wasn't intended to induce their business.

That's currently not allowed under the regulations promulgated by DFS nearly two years ago. Those were the result of an investigation by the agency that found some title insurance agents spent millions marketing themselves to prospective clients. Those costs were then passed on to homebuyers, according to the agency.

Representatives from the title insurance industry have said the agency's findings were the exception among their colleagues, not the rule. The regulations promulgated thereafter have prevented them from billing something as frugal as a meal with a client or prospective client, even if that meeting was not a quid pro quo transaction.

Supporters of the regulations have argued that they're intended to drive down the cost of buying a home. The Partnership for New York City, a nonprofit economic development organization, was among those supporters and, consequently, opposed Breslin's bill.

Kathryn Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, lobbied lawmakers directly on the issue, but said some didn't need convincing. Several members of the Senate who first took office this year had either already taken a position on the matter or were receptive to their arguments, Wylde said.

“I think you have a number of new legislators who are looking at issues with fresh eyes and largely ran on support for affordable housing,” Wylde said. “So, I think what happened was there was a recognition that there have been practices in the title industry that were creating unnecessary costs to home purchases.”

It helped that Wylde also had a pair of the state's top consumer protection officials on her side.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who hadn't previously taken a public position on the issue, wrote to lawmakers early last week asking them to reject the bill. The letter was sent to lawmakers two days before this year's legislative session was scheduled to end, though insiders have said the legislation was already dead at that point.

“As the state's chief enforcer of consumer protection law, [the Office of the Attorney General] believes this legislation will harm consumers by allowing practices within the title insurance industry that amount to bribery and corruption,” James wrote.

She noted that consumers often don't select title insurance agents; that's done by real estate attorneys or brokers. The legislation would have made it easier for agents to illegally induce their business, James wrote.

Vullo, who was in office when the regulations were promulgated, also did more than just pen the memo sent to members of the Senate earlier this month. She spoke directly to lawmakers about the agency's regulations at times, and even published an op-ed in the New York Daily News urging them to oppose it.

When reached for comment Monday, Vullo gave credit to the Senate for rejecting the bill.

“The Senate laudably sided with consumers in not passing the title industry's bill, which would have gutted important DFS regulations, upheld by the Appellate Division, that will now help reduce closing costs and put an end to unscrupulous conduct,” Vullo said.

The New York State Land Title Association, which represents the industry, had sued the state after the regulations were finalized in 2017, saying they went beyond the statutory authority of the agency. That argument was well-received in Manhattan Supreme Court last year, where the regulations were struck down.

That win was short-lived for the industry; an appellate court in Manhattan reinstated the regulations in a decision handed down earlier this year. The case was sent back to the trial court for further litigation but could ultimately end up at the state's highest court.

Bob Treuber, executive director of the NYSLTA, defended the industry in a statement Monday and said it'll continue advocacy efforts going forward.

“Title insurance providers work hard to protect and advance homeownership for New Yorkers — one of the cornerstones of our economy,” Treuber said. “Despite opponents' misleading attacks, we will continue to fight for homeowners and the more than 2,000 small title insurance businesses that rely on ordinary marketing activities — including having a cup of coffee with a client or potential client — that are afforded to all other professionals across the state.”

It's unclear if lawmakers will try to amend the bill and ask their colleagues to consider it again next year. It's sponsored in the Assembly by Assemblyman Kevin Cahill, D-Ulster, who chairs the chamber's Insurance Committee.

READ MORE: